AuthorTopic: A question ... (Read 6851 times)

I'm posting this in this forum just because I'm curious to know whether other people think it's important.

Am I the only one who likes to have numlock on when I log into X? I like it, I really do. I hate when after I log in I hit the keypad and don't get a number.

So here I am running VL 5.9 RC1 (waiting for the final to come out before another install). I figure NumlockX should do the trick.

I downloaded the source for NumlockX 1.1 and tried to use M0E's vpackager to compile it. No dice. Then I tried compiling it, y'know, manually, and got an error message telling me it couldn't find the X libraries. With the fury of a thousand suns I slammed my fists onto my keyboard, and completely by accident a numlockx.SlackBuild file and a slack-desc file downloaded, a terminal opened, and the thing compiled by itself. I installed it, and it works. But it's not built specifically for 5.9, plus it wasn't built in a clean build environment, so I can't share it with everyone.

What do you all think? Is this important enough to have a VL-specific package, or did I damage my prefontal cortex when I bumped my head this morning ('cuz, y'know, that would impair my judgement).

Yeah, I'm off work today. That's why I'm writing these crazy posts.

Logged

"I'm doing a (free) operating system (just a hobby, won't be big and professional like gnu) for 386(486) AT clones." - Linus Torvalds, April 1991

I use numlock every time I run VL. Just so much easier for me to type numbers and stuff. Not convinced that numlock works properly with VL5.9, but I'm the only one that I know that's said anything about it. It's most likely that I would have interest in that package.

I can see a good case for having numlockx available. Certainly, on a desktop, I prefer having numlock on.

Just please don't do what Zenwalk does. During install, the user is prompted as to whether they want numlock on (which defaults to yes). There are two stages in the Zenwalk setup - one for console and one for X. The console is handled by /etc/rc.d/rc.numlock, and if this is set executable, a test in the GDM init then activates numlockx for X sessions.

The problem with the Zenwalk system is that every time an update to the systemtools package is installed, it comes with a replacement /etc/rc.d/rc.numlock, set executable, naturally. Which is fine for most desktops, but a real pain for laptop users. When an update includes an update to the systemtools package, I always have to remember to go and remove the executable bit on /etc/rc.d/rc.numlock for my laptop, or I can't log in...

There must be a better way of handling it without having to make the user do all the work.

For numerical input the numerical island ... or whatchacallit?? ... is far more suited than the numbers on top of the main keyboard part. So yes, num lock should be on for the machines that have that IMHO.

But on my lappy, without a numerical island, it's crippling. j=1 k=2 l=3 u=4 i=5 o=6 and so on...

So, I beg you, please, whatever you decide, make it easy to change.

Oh! Sorry, responded before reading properly. toothandnail (there must be a story behind a name like that ) already pointed that out.

But to add on that. I know I should chmod -x /etc/rc.d/rc.numlock... but you know... It's a mouseless operation. Kids today wont think of that I really think that this is something that should be in KDE's configuration center.

Would it be possible that someone is prompted the first time they press numlock for this question? (Well, it is possible of course... so the real question is, is this worth the trouble??)

But to add on that. I know I should chmod -x /etc/rc.d/rc.numlock... but you know... It's a mouseless operation. Kids today wont think of that I really think that this is something that should be in KDE's configuration center.

It's included in KDE CC already. Since Vector Standard is shipped with XFCE, I think numlockx is ideal for doing this stuff. Just put it in XFCE Autostarted apps. And yes numlockx, or some other suitable option, must be included in Vector isos.

Make that: VL4.0, where I brought it up and quite like the versions before as well.I always found it retarded that a BIOS-setting(Which in most BIOSses is set to "off" by default and it being on hence is a "user-defined prefference") is overridden by the kernel.It may be my biggest gripe with Linux: Dont mess with MY choices in the BIOS; I put them there for a reason!

I wonder what the hell the reason for this "Daddy-knows-best"-attitude is....